CITY ROOM; A Defendant Pays the Price For Talking to Reporters

By JOHN ELIGON

Published: July 17, 2010

So that's why they tell their clients not to talk to us.

Part of the ritual in covering courts as a reporter is going to lawyers after their clients are accused of something and getting the token ''No comment'' or ''We intend to vigorously dispute these charges'' or, in the lucky few cases, a detailed explanation of their client's position. Almost never does the lawyer offer up the client to speak.

After Lynne F. Stewart, a disbarred lawyer convicted in 2005 of assisting terrorism, was sentenced to 10 years in prison on Thursday, it became somewhat clearer why many lawyers advise their clients to keep their mouths shut.

Ms. Stewart was charged with smuggling information from an imprisoned client, Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, to his violent followers in Egypt. The judge, John G. Koeltl of Federal District Court in Manhattan, was forced to resentence Ms. Stewart after an appeals court ruled that his initial sentence of 28 months was too light.

Among the reasons Judge Koeltl gave for his new sentence were comments Ms. Stewart made to the media after she was sentenced the first time in 2006.

Ms. Stewart said that she could do 28 months ''standing on my head'' and that she would not take back the actions that led to her conviction. Those comments, the judge said in court Thursday, indicated ''a lack of remorse'' and that ''the original sentence was not sufficient.''

Ouch!

''You invite the law of unintended consequences'' by speaking to the media, said Andrew M. Lankler, a defense lawyer.

Mr. Lankler generally refuses to comment for reporters - except to explain to Courthouse Confidential his take on dealing with the media.

''There are three occasions where people speak to the media,'' Mr. Lankler said. ''The first is, you didn't do it, your client didn't do it, and it's important for the world to know your client didn't do it.

''The other time you talk to the media is when you totally did it - there's no ifs, ands or buts. You might as well get out ahead of it and try to poison the jury pool as fast as possible.

''Every other reason, in my opinion, it's a mistake because you don't know how it's going to spin.''

What is particularly striking about Ms. Stewart's media blunder is that it came at a moment when one would think would be the safest to open up - after your punishment is handed down.

''There is a lesson: Don't speak to the media until it's really over,'' said Daniel S. Parker, a defense lawyer. ''In this case it wasn't over enough.''

Before becoming a lawyer, Mr. Parker dabbled in journalism as the editor of his college newspaper and a brief stint as a stringer for The New York Times. Talking to the press can lead to mixed results, Mr. Parker said. In Ms. Stewart's case, he said he believed that her comments after receiving a lenient sentence seemed to indicate she had ''lost her perspective.''

''Clients can be their own worst enemies,'' he said. ''Other times clients can be their most effective advocates.''

Gerald L. Shargel, a defense lawyer who also teaches at Brooklyn Law School, said he believed that Ms. Stewart's remarks were taken the wrong way. Mr. Shargel said Ms. Stewart spoke to one of his classes and he believed she really did have remorse.

''I think she didn't want to show that she was crumbling or crying or anything else,'' he said. ''She made some statement of bravado, which I think was more bravado than real.''

The comment probably did not really influence the judge, Mr. Shargel, and were probably just ''a hook to hang on.''

Judicial Field Trip

Justice Roger S. Hayes of State Supreme Court in Manhattan made an uncommon move Thursday - he took a trial on the road.

Justice Hayes, who is hearing the manslaughter case of William Rapetti, a rigging contractor, without a jury, took the parties in the case to a police yard in Red Hook, Brooklyn, to examine pieces of a crane at issue in the case.

Mr. Rapetti is charged with using faulty slings on a tower crane on East 51st Street, a decision that prosecutors contend led the crane to collapse in March 2008 and kill seven people.

Along for the trip were the judge and his law secretary; Mr. Rapetti and his lawyers, Arthur L. Aidala and John S. Esposito; the two prosecutors and a paralegal; three court officers; Mr. Rapetti's wife and daughter; and a court stenographer.

According to Mr. Aidala, the evidence was laid out on three separate flatbeds - one with the mast of the crane, another with steel beams that held it to the building and a third with collars that went around the crane. Justice Hayes spent 30 to 45 minutes inspecting the evidence without saying anything, other than to make a crack about the heat, Mr. Aidala said.

The trial is expected to go to closing arguments Monday.

Hiring

Daniel J. Horwitz, whose clients have included Bernard L. Madoff and David Letterman, has joined Lankler & Carragher as a partner, the firm announced this week. Mr. Horwitz was previously at Dickstein Shapiro and before that he was an assistant district attorney in Manhattan.

Attorney General Debate

The five democratic candidates for New York State attorney general will debate Tuesday evening at Cardozo Law School on Fifth Avenue in Manhattan.

John Eligon and other court reporters for The New York Times bring you inside the city's halls of law every Friday. Have a tip? Send an email to CourthouseConfidential@nytimes.com.

This is a more complete version of the story than the one that appeared in print.